Booster Bottles
- Thread starter OzDragster
- Start date
So having a secondary chamber with fuel and air inside it with a backfire would not cause an explosion?
Also WTF are pop rocks?
Also WTF are pop rocks?
You can not compress a gas enough to back any fuel up into a boost bottle. What it's for is increased volume in the intake tract to smooth out pulses. Improperly placed the worst it can do is nothing.
Just don't expect seat-of-the-pants power improvements. It works best as part of a hi-performance package.
Just don't expect seat-of-the-pants power improvements. It works best as part of a hi-performance package.
Hi everybody, I'm new here, G'day.
I have been very interested in this subject for awhile now, and have a theory I'd like to run past some knowledgeable people such as yourselves....
My thinking is that if it's purpose is to "smooth out" air/fuel mix flow properties in the intake to combustion chamber, and it baffles the air/fuel mix that is left after the piston closes of the port, the "boost bottle" doesn't need to be the same size as the engine capacity!?, Here me out please
....
I think it would only need to be approx. 1/2 the volumetric capacity of the intake from the back of the slide to the piston wall at the closed port. taking into account volumetric efficiency the air/fuel mix left in the intake tract isn't going to be engine capacity, as barrametric pressure and the vacume created won't draw enough to compress the a/f mix once the cumbustion chamber port is closed, Having a boost bottle approx half the intake tract capacity should be enough to soften or baffle the "bounce back" affect of the a/f mix, without being big enough to affect idle?
If the Boost bottle was a larger diameter then the intake manifold then the pressure drop from manifold to Boost bottle would be more then enough to baffle any "bounce back", I think... Ideally I would think that a "boost bottle chamber" the same diameter as intake manifold with an opening or port the 1/2 the "boost bottle diameter would be close to perfect. I have a paintshop diagram but am unsure of how to post it sorry, would be happy to e-mail though.
with a set-up like I tried to describe, I would think there wouldn't be huge power increase's, but would expect smoother acceleration, crisper throttle response and maybe a little more torque by way of better air/fuel mix and smoother less turbulant delivery of the mix to the combustion chamber allowing for better volumetric effeintcy.
This is just a thought, not proven. I am throwing it out there looking for constructive feedback from people with an understanding of combustion engines please, Thanks in advance
I have been very interested in this subject for awhile now, and have a theory I'd like to run past some knowledgeable people such as yourselves....
My thinking is that if it's purpose is to "smooth out" air/fuel mix flow properties in the intake to combustion chamber, and it baffles the air/fuel mix that is left after the piston closes of the port, the "boost bottle" doesn't need to be the same size as the engine capacity!?, Here me out please
....I think it would only need to be approx. 1/2 the volumetric capacity of the intake from the back of the slide to the piston wall at the closed port. taking into account volumetric efficiency the air/fuel mix left in the intake tract isn't going to be engine capacity, as barrametric pressure and the vacume created won't draw enough to compress the a/f mix once the cumbustion chamber port is closed, Having a boost bottle approx half the intake tract capacity should be enough to soften or baffle the "bounce back" affect of the a/f mix, without being big enough to affect idle?
If the Boost bottle was a larger diameter then the intake manifold then the pressure drop from manifold to Boost bottle would be more then enough to baffle any "bounce back", I think... Ideally I would think that a "boost bottle chamber" the same diameter as intake manifold with an opening or port the 1/2 the "boost bottle diameter would be close to perfect. I have a paintshop diagram but am unsure of how to post it
sorry, would be happy to e-mail though.with a set-up like I tried to describe, I would think there wouldn't be huge power increase's, but would expect smoother acceleration, crisper throttle response and maybe a little more torque by way of better air/fuel mix and smoother less turbulant delivery of the mix to the combustion chamber allowing for better volumetric effeintcy.
This is just a thought, not proven. I am throwing it out there looking for constructive feedback from people with an understanding of combustion engines please, Thanks in advance
